Herniotomy and its outcome in congenital inguinal hernia at a tertiary care hospital: descriptive study

Authors

  • Babasaheb S. Dhakne Department of Surgery, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
  • A. N. Beedkar Department of Surgery, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
  • Mayur R. Dalvi Department of Surgery, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
  • Bhushan S. Bhalgat Department of Surgery, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20164401

Keywords:

Inguinal hernia in children, Reactive hydrocele, Superficial inguinal ring

Abstract

Background:Herniotomy has been a standard mode of treatment for inguinal hernia which is a frequently encountered problem in children. It is considered to be easy to perform along with a good rate of success and low frequency of complications. Present study describes our experience with management of inguinal hernia in children by herniotomy with respect to operative procedure details and outcome at a government tertiary care referral centre in Aurangabad district of Maharashtra in India.

Methods: The present prospective observational study was done between July 2014 and July 2016 at Surgery Department, Government Medical College and Hospital in Aurangabad district of Maharashtra state in India. 99 patients of age group 0-10 years diagnosed clinically as congenital inguinal hernia and managed by elective herniotomy were included in the study. Details like age at operation, type of anaesthesia, length of incision, whether superficial inguinal ring opened or not, whether sac was found or not, contents of sac, method and material used for skin closure, experience of operating surgeon, duration of hospital stay and complications were described.

Results:In our study of 99 cases, 64 patients weight was between 9 - 16 kg. Most of the cases (89) were managed under general anaesthesia. Few cases among those aged above 5 years were operated under spinal anaesthesia (8) and caudal block (2). In 89 cases herniotomy was successfully done by 1 - 1.5 cm incision. In 10 cases we were required to extend our incision up to 2 cm or more. As in patients of 2 years or below age group, the superficial and deep rings are near to each other, in such cases we needed to open superficial ring. We have opened superficial ring in 8 cases. Content of the sac was omentum in most cases (87) whereas sac contained bowel in 5 cases. Subcuticular method of skin closure was used in most cases (72). Vicryl 3-0 suture material was used in most cases (85). 89 cases were operated by lecturers and senior surgeons of Surgery department whereas 10 cases were operated by doctors pursuing postgraduate course in surgery. Herniotomy is day care procedure but most of our patients (87) required 2 day stay in hospital. Reactive hydrocele was noticed in 22 cases and all of them resolved by second week. On the day of stitch removal, 6 patients were having pain while there was no patient with complaint of pain in second week.

Conclusions:Thus, as per our study observations, herniotomy was a fairly effective procedure with no unresolved complications observed at the end of second week.

References

Lloyd DA, Rintala RJ. Inguinal hernia and hydrocele. In: O'Neill JA Jr, Rowe MI, Grosfeld JC, et al., editors. (eds). Pediatric Surgery. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 1998;1071–1086.

Saranga Bharathi R, Arora M, Baskaran V. Pediatric inguinal hernia: Laparoscopic versus open surgery. JSLS. 2008;12:277–81.

Kapur P, Caty MG, Glick PL. Pediatric hernias and hydroceles. Pediatr Clin North Am 2008;45:773-85.

Nazem M, Heydari Dastgerdi MM, Sirousfard M. Outcomes of pediatric inguinal hernia repair with or without opening the external oblique muscle fascia . J Res Med Sci 2015;20:1172-6

Acharya H, Agrawal R, Agrawal V, Tiwari A, Chanchlani R. Management of inguinal hernia in children: a single center experience of 490 patients. Int Surg J. 2016;3:345-8.

Lau ST, Lee YH, Caty MG. Current management of hernias and hydroceles. Semin Pediatr Surg. 2007;16:50-7.

Suvera MS, Damor PB, Patel SV. Surgery for inguinal hernia in pediatric age. Int J Res Med Sci. 2013;1:112-5.

Weber TR, Tracy TF. Groin hernia and hydroceles. In: Ashcraft KW editor. Pediatric Surgery. Philadelphia, A: WB Saunders, 2004; 654-62.

Ravikumar V, Rajshankar S, Hareesh RS, Nagendra GM. A clinical study on the management of inguinal hernias in children on the general surgical practice. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(1):144-7.

Lange DH, Kreeft M, Ramshorst GH, Aufenacker TJ, Rauwerda JA, Simons MP. Inguinal hernia surgery in the Netherlands: are patients treated according to the guidelines? Hernia. 2010;14(2):143-8.

Ramanathan SB, Arora M, Baskaran V. Pediatric inguinal hernia laparoscopic versus open surgery. JSLS. 2008;12(3):277-81.

Chan KL, Hui WC, Tam PKH. Prospective, randomized, single centre, single blind comparison of laparoscopic vs open repair of pediatric inguinal hernia. Surg Endosc. 2005;19:927-32.

Gahukamble DB, Khamage AS. Prospective randomized controlled study of excision versus distal splitting of hernial sac and processus vaginalis in the repair of inguinal hernias and communicating hydroceles. J Pediatr Surg. 1995;30(4):624-5.

Arbinder KS, Aseem RS. Pediatric inguinal hernia and hydrocele. In: Wilcox D, Godbole P, Cooper C. Paediatric urology book. London : Gary Bagshawe at GBC Productions.

Bharathi SR, Arora M, Baskaran V. How we seal the internal ring in pediatric inguinal hernias. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2008;18(2):192-4.

Kareem AA, Juma KM. Herniotomy in infants, children and adolescents without disruption of external ring. World J Laparoscopic Surg. 2009;2:13-6.

Downloads

Published

2016-12-13

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles